Please "mouse in" and look at the first line of Item 5 on the instruction sheet.
I emailed the seller and to his credit he phoned me quickly and ended the auction. Seems he bought them in good faith at a property auction. Only trouble was, they likely weren't legally saleable.
I'm confused. If he bought them, why can't he sell them, no matter who used to own them? Am I missing something?
The item appears as though it may be stolen....inadvertently or otherwise.....notwithstanding the fact that the eBay seller bought the item at an auction. And, if the item has in fact been stolen, the holder can not legally sell the item.
That is a whole lot of information from what I see, other then the word, "Remanufactured"
Read "Item 5 on the instruction sheet."
So, R.V. you are saying you never charged the $25.00 after 60 days so the box is still yours?
Im confused also. I understand that the box and retainers are your property. I assume that you are saying the cores were not returned to you with the box. I also see where you will bill the person who does not return the box. How do you know that you did not bill the previous owner for a unreturned box and cores. If you billed the previous owner for the unreturned items,and received payment thru credit card or ????, then the box and cores "does belong to them" and they can sell them ..... ??? Im not on either side of this fence, but its not clear on all the details ...
I guess I don't get it. If I put my name on a box of widgets that means they can never be sold again?? It says the box and the keepers are the property of RV and if you don't return it you get charged $25, so that's all they are worth. The magnets can be sold. That piece of paper could be 50 years old, what is the statute of limitations on it?
The loaner shipping box was billed but never paid, nor were the cores ever returned or paid for. That wasn't made clear in my post, Donnie and others, and I apologize.
That said, I'm not going to chase after it, because it would be more trouble to me than it's worth. My point was/is to be careful what you buy at auctions like this guy says he did, or what you buy anywhere for that matter, in case that which the seller claims he owns is in fact someone else's property.
RV: Thanks for clarifying, In that case the box and magnets are yours. I agree its probably more trouble than its worth. It is good advice to watch what we buy, but in the real world there is no way to know for sure on anything we buy. We can just try to make the best decisions we can, with the info we have. If these were sold at an estate sale, there is the possibility that the original buyer got sick, died, or ??? In that case there may have been no one to take care of the returns or even anyone that knew it should be done. Thanks again for clarifying .....
Its been many years since law school but I think a good faith purchaser of personal property for value can pass good title to a subsequent buyer. I am unsure if R.V. informing the eBay seller of the situation would change that. I would think not because he met the criteria at the time of his purchase. Hard to say. Kinda sorry I got rid of all my law books.
I read this story today about craft brewers not getting their kegs returned and it made me think of this post. Different commodity, same rules apply.
If Frank steals your Model T and sells it to James as though it was his, then James sells it to Fred in good faith and if what you say is true, then Fred should have clear title. I don't think your statement is accurate, or I don't understand what you have stated.
A few weeks ago a guy was selling a Simplex motorbike on ebay. He said he got it from a guy who drug it out of a shed on a mountain side. He bought it only to try to flip it for a profit. Unfortunately, the owner of that shed wasn't happy to see the bike on ebay, so called to set up an appointment to view the bike. He showed up with a policeman to make sure it went back home with him. The seller was left holding the bag....
I agree Mike, that was a stolen item, but in RV,s case, he stipulated terms and conditions for the return of his property in his instructions of 60 days or be charged, after the time had lapsed, he has informed us that he failed to compensate him self for the lose, so question is, has he got the legal right to make claim to it still be his property or an issue he can only take up with the original purchaser and not the owner of it now?
Ted, I think Fred does have good title in your illustration. I believe that's why vehicles are registered with the state, to give notice to any prospective buyer of true ownership, so that he cannot be a good faith purchaser, by that I mean he is deemed to have notice via registration that the car belongs to someone else. If he's not a good faith purchaser, he acquires no better title than the crook who stole the car, ie., no title at all. Real estate titles are recorded to give notice to the world of true ownership so if someone were to do what Frank did in your hypothetical, the buyer would have constructive notice that you are the rightful owner.
However my memory is not the best, so I might be all wet on this. Maybe someone with better knowledge (or at least a better memory) can chime in. ;^)